Switzerland’s Recreational Cannabis Pilot Shows Tendency Towards ‘Lower-Risk Consumption’

The preliminary findings from Switzerland’s seven active pilot trials, involving around three per cent of the country’s active cannabis consumers, have been published by a local university.

Just days after Switzerland announced it was positioning itself to become the first European country to launch a full commercial adult-use cannabis market, an analysis of its pioneering adult-use pilot trials has provided some early insights into the impact its ambitious plans could have on Swiss society.

With the seven different pilots all exploring unique ways of selling and dispensing cannabis, these pilot projects are inextricably linked to its wider cannabis reform project, and the pilots will help provide an evidence-based framework for similar projects across the globe moving forward. While the trials are still in their nascent stages, the early signs appear promising.

Preliminary findings

The University of Lausanne and the University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland carried out an analysis of all of the seven trials green lit since the first trial (Weed Care) was green lit in 2023.

Conducted on behalf of the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH), the study examines the initial experiences of the projects from 2023 to mid-2024, examining the impact each different sales model has on health and consumption.

Across the various trials situated in Basel-Stadt, Bern, Biel, Lausanne, Lucerne, Vernier, the City of Zurich as well as various municipalities in the canton of Zurich and Basel-Landschaft, around 7000 adults are currently thought to be participating in the studies, though their collective mandate allows for significantly more to take part.

This sample generally has a higher level of education than the general population, with nearly half of participants holding a university degree, and it is made up predominantly (80.07%) of males with a mean age of 36.6 years.

While the report stipulates that due to the ‘short implementation period’ the results are ‘limited and must be considered preliminary’, a few key observations are already coming to light.

Firstly, and perhaps most importantly for the stated goal of harm reduction, the results indicate that while consumers generally stick to their established consumption patterns, if there is a change it ‘is established in the direction of lower-risk consumption’ via methods like vapes.

Meanwhile it noted a ‘destigmatising effect’ for consumers, particularly in trials conducted in pharmacies rather than dedicated dispensaries, and in social clubs. Non-profit associations were found to ‘promote the construction of a community of peers’.

Despite concerns around adverse social impacts on the communities where the trials are taking place, ‘no disturbance of public order’ were observed around the points of sale, and no leakage of the cannabis from the trials into the illicit market was observed.

The police have also shown themselves to be in favour of the trials in all the cases studied, with the idea of being able to prioritise other tasks.

In some of the for-profit trials, such as Grashaus, the study noted that ‘tensions rose’ between the company funding and supplying the project and the scientific team during the recruitment phase, with the company pushing for a broad admission of participants to quickly reach the sample size, and study managers prioritising quality and safety.

Notable differences also arose regarding prevention between the for-profit and non-profit trials, with results suggesting non-profit studies tended to see staff push more proactively for things like smoking cessation intervention, while the for-profit trials placed greater emphasis on individual responsibility.

For-profit trials were also found to advertise much more aggressively. While the promotion of cannabis products is banned across all schemes, the advertising of the pilot itself is allowed, and profit-focused trials were found to be much more present on social media and targeted younger audiences, while non-profit trials offered neutral and factual information.

Wider impact on politics and further reform

While the preliminary results are valuable in themselves, the overarching goal of these studies is to determine the best possible framework for wider reform, acting largely as a precursor for potential full legalisation.

As such, the study suggests with the establishment of its network of pilot trials, the ‘Swiss legislator has equipped itself with a tool to gather a rich evidence base to fuel reflections on the cannabis issue’.

It adds that as cannabis is ‘often the subject of lively political debate in the country’, with discussions ‘almost constant’ at the federal level, the studies are likely to provide ‘food for thought not only on the advisability of regulation but also on its exact terms if necessary’.

Political trends can already be observed across the various participating cantons, the report states. The first and most surprising is that the opinions of political parties have ‘only evolved in favour of the tests’ over the last decade.

Media coverage, meanwhile has been ‘neutral and informative’ for the most part, emphasising the technical aspects of each trial, though its noted that coverage was marked by a ‘slightly favourable orientation’ towards the trials.

Even in regions with political resistance, such as Bern, opposition has softened over time, reflecting a broader shift in public and political attitudes toward cannabis regulation.

In cities like Zurich and Basel, the media has highlighted potential economic and social benefits, including reductions in the illegal market and improved public safety.

While some criticism remains, particularly in concerns over the ethical implications of cannabis sales in pharmacies and the possible unintended consequences of regulation, most discussions have framed these issues as challenges to be addressed rather than reasons to reject the trials.

The trials have also been seen as an opportunity to inform future cannabis policies, with political discourse increasingly leaning towards pragmatic and scientific approaches rather than strict prohibition​.

This article was originally published by Business of Cannabis and is reprinted here with permission.